| Kuzman Ganchev on Tue, 12 Feb 2002 16:30:22 +0100 |
|
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 08:56:13PM -0500, Jon Galt wrote: > My original point was to agree with Mike Leone that > Microsoft was not the primary factor in making the standard PC hardware so > cheap - IBM's intentional openness with their specs is what did it. In > fact, I would say that Microsoft was more of a beneficiary than a cause of > cheap hardware. I think that Microsoft's soft de-facto position (I'm not talking about words here) on software piracy was a part of that. I think that if MS had cracked down on piracy back in the day, the PC might not have done so well. In any case, if they crack down now, I think they would get screwed. This is more the case in Eastern Europe than in the states but, people would be willing to make a minor adjustment to save a few hundred dollars (= more than a month's wages in Bulgaria), that they would not be willing to make if they can safely pirate software. This is why I am strongly against pirated software - especially software that I don't like to use. I think that there should be well known rules to the game (as opposed to harsh laws that are not enforced as a general rule). Kuzman PS: yeah, I know the choir. Attachment:
pgp3AGZjKMgBP.pgp
|
|